Keywords

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Chapter Objectives

  1. 1.

    To understand the concept of cross-media advertising

  2. 2.

    To understand the reasons why advertisers choose to use multiple media in a campaign

  3. 3.

    To learn about the theoretical processes underlying cross-media synergy

  4. 4.

    To understand how the factors fit, sequence and multitasking influence cross-media synergy

  5. 5.

    To learn about cross-media research in the field and identify its strengths and weaknesses

Introduction

Media convergence provides advertisers with complex challenges. Target groups are fragmented because of the enormous growth in media outlets. Consumers are less attentive because of media multitasking, and more selective because of interactive and “on demand” media options, making it easier than ever to avoid advertising. It is, therefore, increasingly difficult for marketers to reach their target groups, attract attention to their messages, and generate advertising effects.

Cross-media advertising—advertising in which more than one medium platform is engaged in communicating related brand content—is one way advertisers have responded to these challenges. In cross-media campaigns, advertisers seek to maximize the effectiveness of their budgets by exploiting the unique strength of each medium and by taking advantage of cross-media synergies. As Ephron (2000, p. 10) succinctly put it: “Old media planning was about picking individual media. New media planning is about picking combinations of media.”

One of the biggest questions in cross-media advertising is how each medium in a cross-media campaign not only adds to but also enhances the contribution of the other media. This question is driven by the potential existence of synergy (Naik and Raman 2003).

This chapter aims to provide the reader with insight into cross-media advertising in practice, the reasons for choosing cross-media advertising, the theoretical processes underlying cross-media synergy, the multitasking consumer, and research into the reach and effects of cross-media advertising.

Cross-media Advertising in Practice

Figure 9.1 shows the advertising expenditures of an automobile brand in the Netherlands over a 1-year period. For each week of the year, we can see the amount of money spent on advertising in different media. The figure shows that this brand advertises on TV, radio, and the Internet, in newspapers and magazines, with out-of-home advertising, and via direct mail. In other words, the brand is a cross-media advertiser spending its money on multiple media, even in the same week.

Fig. 9.1
figure 00091

Media expenditures of an automobile brand (52 weeks)

Full size image

The degree to which brands use different media in their campaigns varies. A study by Klausch et al. (2010) into the share and composition of 2,569 campaigns in the Netherlands (all in 2007) showed that about 40 % were cross-media campaigns. One-third of the campaigns used two media, 17 % three, 7 % four, and in the other campaigns more than four media were used. The most popular combinations were television and magazines (8 %), TV and radio (6 %), TV, radio, and newspapers (3 %), and TV and newspapers (3 %).

Figure 9.2 shows that campaigns in which more media are used are more expensive; putting it the other way around, more expensive campaigns are more likely to use multiple media.

Fig. 9.2
figure 00092

Relationship between number of media used in the campaign and campaign expenditures

Full size image

The number of media used in campaigns differs across industry sectors. Cross-media campaigns are especially popular in the car and motorcycle, telecom, and ICT markets. On the other hand, cross-media campaigns are less popular in campaigns for detergents, luxuries, textile, shoes, body care, and food.

Reasons for Choosing Cross-media Advertising

Why are cross-media campaigns so popular? In this section, four reasons for the use of multiple media in a campaign will be discussed:

  1. 1.

    Target group extension

  2. 2.

    Complementary effects

  3. 3.

    Repetition

  4. 4.

    Synergy

Target Group Extension

Probably the most common reason for choosing multiple media in a campaign is target group extension: by using multiple media, a campaign can reach a larger part of the target group (Bronner et al. 2003).

An example of a cross-media campaign aimed at target group extension was an advertisement for vodka that appeared on TV as well as in print media (Bronner 2006). These different media were selected because of the wish to reach different targets groups: the print media would reach people who were not regular TV viewers. This is illustrated by Fig. 9.3 (fictitious example).

Fig. 9.3
figure 00093

Illustration of target group extension: reach of TV and newspapers for heavy, average, and light TV viewers

Full size image

Complementary Effects

When different media are combined in a campaign, the campaign can profit from the strength of each of the media: media may complement each other (Dijkstra et al. 2005). Such complementarities can be based on objective media characteristics, such as modalities or pacing. For example, when looking at or reading magazine ads, people have control over the moment and speed of information transfer (internal pacing) which allows larger texts to be processed; with television ads, on the other hand, the pace and moment are externally controlled. Complementarities can also be based on how people experience advertising in the different media. For example, advertising on television excels at conveying emotions, outdoor advertising is particularly suited for raising awareness, print is primarily experienced as a medium for providing information, and the internet scores high in providing information, feedback, and possibilities for transaction (Bronner and Neijens 2006). The campaign for the Dutch genever Hooghoudt, for example, was inspired by a search for complementary effects. The print ad showed the brand, the copy text read “bold men are better lovers,” and included a URL for more information on the internet (Bronner 2006).

Repetition

To maximize the effects of advertising, people may need to be repeatedly exposed to the same message. However, at a certain moment, people get used to a message and wear-out occurs. This means that people get annoyed and that the effectiveness of an advertisement no longer increases. Several studies have underlined the negative effect of repetition, conceptualizing it with the Differential Attention Hypothesis (Unnava and Burnkrant 1991) and the Repetition Variation Theory (Stammerjohan et al. 2005; Yaveroglu and Donthu 2008). Cross-media advertising is often used to slow down this process of wear-out (Dijkstra et al. 2005) because using varied messages or varying the media in which the message is presented will reduce wear-out effects.

A cross-media repetition strategy was applied in the so-called Bob campaign to prevent driving under the influence of alcohol in the Netherlands (Bronner 2006). Bob is the name given to the person who stays sober on an evening out and who drives his or her friends back home. The campaign presents the same message on the radio and in outdoor advertising. A cross-media strategy was consciously chosen in this campaign to make it possible to repeat the message without wear-out.

Synergy

Another example of a cross-media campaign was that for Cup-a-Soup, which used a funny TV commercial and a radio commercial with the same sound (Bronner 2006). When listing to the radio commercial, people remembered the TV commercial, which gave an extra dimension to the radio commercial, a process called visual transfer. In this case, the use of multimedia was inspired by a search for synergy effects, which can be defined as the added value of a medium (in this case radio) that results from the presence of another medium (in this case TV), causing the combined effect of media to exceed the sum of their individual effects (Naik and Raman 2003, p. 385). More synergy effects and the psychological mechanisms underlying these effects are discussed in Sect. 9.4.

Processes Underlying Cross-media Synergy Effects

In this section, the following psychological processes underlying cross-media synergy effects will be discussed: encoding variability, multiple source credibility, forward encoding, backward retrieval.

Encoding Variability

One explanation for synergy effects in a cross-media campaign is that information will be encoded in a more complex fashion when consumers are exposed to the same message in a variety of media rather than being exposed to it in only one medium (Tavassoli 1998). More complex encoding results in a stronger information network in human memory, which in turn leads to enhanced memory performance (Stammerjohan et al. 2005) and more positive attitudes (Tavasolli and Lee 2003).

Multiple Source Credibility

The second mechanism that might explain why cross-media campaigns result in more positive consumer responses than single medium campaigns is multiple source credibility. When consumers are exposed to multiple media in a campaign, they could perceive these media as independent sources of information. Because messages from independent sources are more convincing and credible, being exposed to multiple sources can enhance the persuasive power of a message (Voorveld et al. 2011; Dijkstra 2002; Harkins and Petty 1987; Chang and Thorson 2004).

Forward Encoding

Another process underlying cross-media synergy effects is forward encoding, which occurs when the ad in the first medium primes the consumer’s interest in the ad in the second medium. In other words, forward encoding probably stimulates encoding processes during exposure to the second ad. The first ad may have evoked curiosity and expectations, and this may motivate deeper processing of the second ad, especially when the second ad is presented in another medium. However, when the second ad is an exact copy of the first, people will not be motivated to process the second ad (Voorveld et al. 2011; Bronner et al. 2003; Edell and Keller 1989; Dijkstra 2002).

Backward Retrieval

Backward retrieval occurs when consumers mentally replay the previously seen ad when they are exposed to the second ad. In this process, “the elements in the second ad may serve as a retrieval cue to the ad memory trace from the first exposure” (Dijkstra 2002, 66; see also Chang and Thorson 2004; Voorveld et al. 2011). When the second ad is presented in a different medium, it may serve as a retrieval cue to the stored memory trace (Edell and Keller 1989), and people may imagine the previously seen ad while exposed to the second ad, for example, seeing the images from a TV spot, when they hear an ad on the radio. This is also called visual transfer or radio replay (Edell and Keller 1989; Smit and Neijssel 1998).

The Role of Sequence

To maximize the effect of the memory processes, it is essential to consider the sequence of media messages in a cross-media campaign. In the case of visual transfer, for example, radio is a good follow-up medium for television, but the effect would not be found if the sequence were the other way around. Media sequence in a cross-media campaign is related to the role of the different media in the five phases of consumer decision making (Gullen 2004; Weinblatt 1998) (1) to establish curiosity, (2) to establish the name, (3) to communicate the main message, (4) to support the main message, (5) and to build trust and commitment. Traditionally, television has been considered as the best way to start a campaign, raising interest and creating awareness, followed by print media to communicate, and support the main message in successive phases of the campaign. Research, however, contradicts these general media planning ideas (Dijkstra 2002) and suggests a more sophisticated role of sequence (Voorveld et al. 2011, see Box 9.2).

The Role of Fit

Consistent retrieval cues are very important to facilitate the previously described memory processes of forward encoding and backward retrieval. “Retrieval cues include such things as key visuals or distinctive slogans. Developing consistency with retrieval cues across all media helps to build a strong image for the brand” (Sheehan and Doherty 2001, p.49).

Research into the role of fit in cross media campaigns is scarce. A few studies have focused on tactics such as using a logo (Edell and Keller 1989; Bronner 2006). Other elements that have been considered are having a consistent visual or using a celebrity. Including these elements in the campaign facilitates retrieval and prevents confusing the message across media (Bronner 2006). In addition, strategic elements, such as making the same brand promise in all messages, are important to increase the synergy effect in cross media campaigns. Often these strategic elements differ, which may diminish the cross-media effects (Sheehan and Doherty 2001).

Overall, it is important that the characteristics of the advertisements be congruent for image transfer to occur (e.g., Jagre et al. 2001; Moorman et al. 2002; Neijens et al. 2009). As Smith (2004, p. 460) puts it, “the greater the match-up perceived, the greater the likely transfer of images.”

The Multitasking Consumer

People engage in media multitasking (using multiple media simultaneously) between 24 % and 65 % of the time they are using media (Pilotta and Schultz 2005; Pilotta et al. 2004; Foehr 2006). Of course, not all media are used simultaneously in the same way. People are most likely to multitask with computers, the Internet, and cell phones, and least likely to multitask when playing games or watching DVDs. Common media combinations are watching TV while being online, and watching TV while reading the newspaper, and browsing Web sites while listening to the radio.

Media multitasking might influence the effects of cross-media campaigns. Some authors argue that multitasking can be beneficial for the effects of advertising in general and cross-media advertising in particular (Pilotta and Schultz 2005; Schultz et al. 2012). However, the positive effects of multitasking have never been shown empirically. Other researchers argue that multitasking is detrimental for advertising effects, because it may inhibit attention to and processing of media messages (Jeong et al. 2010; Papper et al. 2004). See Box 9.3 for an empirical study by Voorveld (2011) that provides empirical support for this idea.

Scholars in the “negative school” argue that media multitasking is detrimental for advertising effects because the limited-capacity model suggests that individuals have a limited amount of cognitive capacity to allocate among different tasks (Lang 2000). During media multitasking, media compete for cognitive resources, and attention has to be divided (Jeong and Fishbein 2007), which influences message processing and effects.

Dual-processing theories, such as the Heuristic–Systematic Model (Chen and Chaiken 1999) and the Elaboration Likelihood Model (Petty and Cacioppo 1986), give insight into how persuasive messages are processed. These theories generally distinguish between two types of processing: systematic or central processing and heuristic or peripheral processing. Systematic processing requires an effort, with extensive elaboration, involving active learning and evaluation of the arguments in the message. Heuristic processing is more superficial and relies on simple heuristic cues or shortcuts, such as the number of arguments, the attractiveness of the source, and emotional appeals (Chen and Chaiken 1999; Petty and Cacioppo 1986). Since media multitasking leads to divided attention, this may result in a reduced ability to process information thoroughly, possibly resulting in persuasion based on superficial cues instead of arguments. Future research is needed to fully understand the influence of media multitasking on advertising effects.

Cross-media Research in the Field

One of the biggest challenges in contemporary advertising research is determining how each medium in a cross-media campaign contributes to the campaign’s impact. A clear answer is not easily found. Standard readership research does not offer a sufficient answer, because this audience research is traditionally focused on measuring just one type of medium. Industry data are available that give insight into TV audiences, radio audiences, newspaper readers and magazine readers, etc., but there is little information on the overlap between people’s use of various media, because these data are collected by different individuals. This section discusses audience research for cross-media campaigns.

Ex ante Data: Data for Cross-Media Planning

In order to plan cross-media campaigns, media planners and marketers need to know what the reach and effects of their messages are. In other words, planners need data on individual media consumption that includes all media platforms in order to be able to answers such questions as:

  • How many and which customers are reached with various combinations of media?

  • What are the effects of different media combinations on brand recall, attitude, and buying intention?

  • What are the effects of different sequences?

To answer these questions, the industry is experimenting with collecting single-source data, measuring all of an individual’s media consumption; this is an innovation since audience readership research has traditionally focused on one medium only. An example of single-source data is project Apollo in the USA, which was promoted as a “single-source” national research service. The project was active between 2006 and 2008, combining media consumption data from Arbitron’s Portable People Meter (Fitzgerald 2004) and ACNielsen’s Homescan consumer product-purchasing data to better correlate the impact of media on purchase decisions. Advertisers such as PepsiCo, Wal-Mart, Procter & Gamble, Kraft, Unilever, S.C. Johnson, and Pfizer were involved. Unfortunately, the project was terminated in 2008 (for discussion of the project see Smit and Neijens 2011).

A second example of a single-source approach is the Simultaneous Media Usage Studies conducted by BIG research. This project focused on media usage by asking questions about what media forms respondents used simultaneously and how each medium influenced purchasing behavior. The data has been gathered twice annually in the USA since 2002 and quarterly in China since 2006 (Schultz et al. 2012).

Touch Points, commissioned by the Institute of Practitioners in Advertising in the UK is a third example of a single-source project. It presents itself as consumer-centered, multimedia research that produces information on consumers’ use of all media. The project was launched in 2006.

A fourth example is 3M (Multiple Media, Multiple Phases, Multiple Products) developed by the authors in 2011; this project registers which media are used in various phases of the consumer decision-making process. A unique feature of this project is that it differentiates between the various stages of the buying process and that it does not focus on purchases in general, but only on specific purchases, because consumers are often unable to correctly report their information search behavior for purchases in general (see Box 9.4).

Ex post Data: Data for Effect Research

Three types of research designs can be distinguished for studying cross-media effects: voluntary exposure, forced exposure, and forced abstinence (Bronner et al. 2003). Voluntary exposure is a popular design. In this design the sample of respondents is, for example, split into a group that encountered the campaign on TV, a group that encountered it in a newspaper, and a group that encountered it in both media. In each group, dependent variables such as brand recall, image, attitude, etc., are measured.

This design is popular, but a problem with it is the self-selection pitfall: consumers in the different media groups are most probably not equivalent (with respect to a great number of variables) and probably had different opinions on the brand before they were exposed to the campaign. In other words, it is not clear whether different opinions about the brand can be attributed to exposure to the campaign or whether these differences already existed before the campaign started. Many trade studies apply this design and suffer from the self selection pitfall (see Box “Classic Media Multiplier Studies”).

An alternative design is forced exposure. In this design, respondents are randomly allocated to different conditions (for example, TV, Newspaper, or both) and are forcefully exposed to the advertising in these conditions. This design guarantees that the respondents in the different groups are equal and that differences in brand recall, brand attitude, and other dependent variables measured after exposure to the ads can be attributed to the different media conditions. A problem of this design, however, is external validity: people are forced to attend to the ads in the different media, which they probably would not do in real life.

A third option is forced abstinence. Under this option some respondents are not exposed to the ads in some media, while others are exposed. For example, some respondents do not get a folder with the brand ad, or in certain areas the newspaper does not contain the ad for the particular brand. This design has the advantage of being realistic (no forced exposure) and the design guarantees equal composition of the different groups. A problem of this design is, however, that forced abstinence is difficult to realize for TV or radio.

Problems and pitfalls in cross-media effect research are numerous. For example, when comparing the effects of single media campaigns with cross-media campaigns, not only do the media differ but also the number of exposures (and possibly their content as well).

Finally, it is important to note that the results acquired from ex-post campaign-tracking studies not only give insight into the success of a campaign but can also provide input for future campaigns (ex ante data).

The Road Ahead

Cross-media campaigns—campaigns in which marketers seek to maximize the effectiveness of their budgets by exploiting the unique strengths of each medium and taking advantage of cross-media synergies—have become widespread. This chapter has looked at the insights provided by current research into cross-media issues. We have discussed the reasons media planners and marketers choose cross-media campaigns: repetition, target group extension, complementary effects, and synergy effects. The chapter has also described the psychological processes underlying cross-media synergy effects: encoding variability, multiple source credibility, forward encoding, and backward retrieval. The roles of fit, sequence, and multitasking were also discussed. The results of the studies described in this chapter provide guidelines for brand managers and advertising agencies.

One of the major challenges for cross-media research is to provide data that support cross-media decisions. Advertisers have formulated the conditions which new media research should fulfill (see also www.wfablueprint.org/goals.php; McDonald 2008). These include single source measurement of all media, measurement of cross-media reach and effects, new metrics like engagement that go a step further than the simplistic people-with-open-eyes-or-ears-in-front-of-the-advertising-space definition of reach, faster and continuous provision of measurement information, large enough sample sizes to measure hard to reach targets, more relevant target group descriptions, and passive measurement systems. Clearly, the age of convergence provide tremendous challenges not only to advertisers, but to advertising researchers as well.